I dont' see how games like wow encourage solo playing.
I played wow a year ago. After reaching endgame, the only thing to do is dungeon, raids, battleground, and arena. All of which need a group.
Also, people laughed about how wow is about gearscoring. But they failed to understand developers like that. When ever themepark players run out of contenrts, the only thing the developers need to do is design a bigger dragon which drop a bigger swords. Which to me is alot easier to do than picking money from the sandbox players.
List your reasons why sandbox is so much greater than themepark.
Theme park style games encourage a certain style of gameplay. Specifically, games like WoW encourage lots of solo quest grinding and discourage community. They feel more like games and less like virtual worlds.
And that's fine, really. There might even be a bigger audience for it. But I think there's also a big, untapped audience that would jump all over a well-made sandbox MMO.
I wrote about some of this here if you're interested.
I suspect there is such a market, but its size has yet to be determined. Given what these titles cost to produce, and the risk adversion involved(especially at this point in history) I suspect that there isn't the funding available for such a project. That may change as middleware evolves further. But for now I'd have to say that the chances aren't too good.
What an absolute brainless bit of crock.Break a definition down past its outmost minimum, and then everything you want can qaulify for it.
"A Chair is a thing that can be sat on "-new definition for a chair,now horses and cats qaulify as chairs.And of course get some puffed up "expert" to explain why this bit of rubbish opinion claimed as THE definition is better then any others........and be sure he references some authority on why he's right,instead of simply using logic and reason lol
Its amazing,most games actually work to raise a persons reasoning ability,but so many die hard mmo fans seem to actually show continued loss of such.....Its like they get dumber by the day.
A sandbox is one of the ultimate representations of free spirited play.You sit it and play with and make of it what ever you want that you can.You dont need someone telling you to build a sand castle before you can do so.You dont need to be told where your allowed to build said castle,YOU pick the spot in the sandbox, and you do it as you please.
The more restrictions on your actions an mmo throws at you, the less sandbox it is.The more guided your actions are in an mmo, the more themepark it is.There is of course no perfection.No perfect example of either,and none possible.But to seize an elephants leg and define it as a tree trunk,is about as well thought out as claiming "all mmos are sandboxs".
A very small ,but very important bit of wisdom when dealing with such...."The word is NOT the thing".In other words ,neither one nor a hundred morons calling a cat a chair,make a cat a chair,OR all mmos sandboxs .
Years ago you could tell the distinct difference between a mmo and a basic online rpg. Now the only difference is a monthly fee and microtransactions. How sad it has become over the years. Now I am not saying it is completely bad because their will be some enjoyable mmos to come but in reality it seems we really haven't improved the genre a whole bunch.
Blah blah blah *Feeling nostalgia* Blah blah blah *Feeling nostalgia* Blah blah my first gaming moments are better then yours Blah blah blah
Whenever I hear anecdotes from old timers about how they were PK'd and lost all there loot 10 years ago I feel like writing move along dude get with the current decade. You may hate them but the big upcoming mmos SWTOR, FF XIV, and Cataclysm show you what most folks really want in online gaming.
Just like there are people who visit disneyland theme parks, there are people who enjoys "packaged" entertainment. There's nothing wrong with theme parks or packaged entertainment. People who try to dictate what other people wants simply are in it for the attention (like "Hey guys I'm cool, look at me, I like doing stuff that others aren't doing!"). Everyone has their own taste in gaming there are people who wants sandbox approach while there are people who wants "packaged" theme park approach.
Years ago you could tell the distinct difference between a mmo and a basic online rpg. Now the only difference is a monthly fee and microtransactions. How sad it has become over the years. Now I am not saying it is completely bad because their will be some enjoyable mmos to come but in reality it seems we really haven't improved the genre a whole bunch.
Yep. MMOs have barely changed in 10 years. Someone needs to start taking risks before the whole genre goes down the tubes.
What an absolute brainless bit of crock.Break a definition down past its outmost minimum, and then everything you want can qaulify for it.
"A Chair is a thing that can be sat on "-new definition for a chair,now horses and cats qaulify as chairs.And of course get some puffed up "expert" to explain why this bit of rubbish opinion claimed as THE definition is better then any others........and be sure he references some authority on why he's right,instead of simply using logic and reason lol
Its amazing,most games actually work to raise a persons reasoning ability,but so many die hard mmo fans seem to actually show continued loss of such.....Its like they get dumber by the day.
A sandbox is one of the ultimate representations of free spirited play.You sit it and play with and make of it what ever you want that you can.You dont need someone telling you to build a sand castle before you can do so.You dont need to be told where your allowed to build said castle,YOU pick the spot in the sandbox, and you do it as you please.
The more restrictions on your actions an mmo throws at you, the less sandbox it is.The more guided your actions are in an mmo, the more themepark it is.There is of course no perfection.No perfect example of either,and none possible.But to seize an elephants leg and define it as a tree trunk,is about as well thought out as claiming "all mmos are sandboxs".
A very small ,but very important bit of wisdom when dealing with such...."The word is NOT the thing".In other words ,neither one nor a hundred morons calling a cat a chair,make a cat a chair,OR all mmos sandboxs .
Nope. It's the absolute truth. That's what the term means. Look it up. I didn't make up a new definition. That's what it's always been. You trying to narrow it doesn't change that. The rest of what you have to say is theusual revisionist garbage. As for your last paragraph back atcha skippy.
The problem is that 'sandbox' is not really a binary term but rather a sliding scale. Every MMO will be part sandbox and part themepark. The important thing is where the restrictions on gameplay are. You go too far in one direction and you end up with Second Life which many people don't really consider a game anymore. You go too far in the other direction and you get into games that are hard to call RPGs anymore.
We are reverting to some pre-mmorpg neolithic game where the mobs just are all over the place, no story, not quests, no classes, no dungeons raids?
Oh you want a completely interactive and player diven world?? Go play free realms, have to warn you its a hauge themepark, since that is what players will ultimately add if given the chance...since you know its what they want.
Give me an example of your sandbox utopia please, im curious to how your game mechanics would flesh out, as well as your purpose in the game.
Give me an example of your sandbox utopia please, im curious to how your game mechanics would flesh out, as well as your purpose in the game.
The far end of the sandbox/themepark spectrum is second life. It is so far on the sandbox end that it almost falls off the end and is nearly not a game. In pure sandbox, there is no defined purpose for a character.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
I saw this thread and the first thing that entered my mind was 'here we go, another pointless 'I hate WoW' thread' .. But then I read it. I absolutely agree with you 100%.. thats all I have to add.
Ive heard this same inane stance before,took some time to remember from where.You read lassi's crap and actually bought it.He couldnt sell it to any but the braindead ,what circa 5 years ago....But you sure latched onto it
Hahahhahhahahhahhhahahhaaha.
Wow.....
Did you just cut and paste from his article,or actually really use wikipedia as a "reliable source" ?You know, like he did.
Again far too funny.
Oh wait, you couldnt have used the wikipedia,at least not recently as they changed that whole article , and instead went with something far more accurate.
"The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by their ability to play creatively, boundless of artificial structural constraints, and with there being "no right way ".
Whats next, gonna try and sell us some "wisdom" on mmo design from Smed,Troop,Godager,McQauid,Garriot,or any other number of the MMO industry failures ?
Regurgitation,its what makes the MMO industry the absolute crap it is.And keeps it that way.And your doing your part arent you ...
they're giving the people what they want, and most people want to keep their loot. most players these days don't like dying in a dungeon and losing all their gear. can you blame them? sure, it makes the game challenging and you have to plan it all out so you don't run in and die, but i think for most people it's just not fun. as for the sandbox style gameplay, old time MMO players just need to realize that things are changing and the new generation of MMO players want theme park style MMOs. sandbox MMOs take up to much time and are harder to get the hang of.
they're giving the people what they want, and most people want to keep their loot. most players these days don't like dying in a dungeon and losing all their gear. can you blame them? sure, it makes the game challenging and you have to plan it all out so you don't run in and die, but i think for most people it's just not fun. as for the sandbox style gameplay, old time MMO players just need to realize that things are changing and the new generation of MMO players want theme park style MMOs. sandbox MMOs take up to much time and are harder to get the hang of.
First of all, I don't think anyone's asking that players lose their gear every time they die. Even in EQ, this almost never happened. Corpses stuck around for what, like a week? If you couldn't find someone to rez you in a week, you didn't deserve your gear back.
Having said that, you're probably right. Most players are looking for theme park games. But that doesn't mean there isn't a sizable contingent out there looking for something else. It may be a niche, but it's a niche of some of the most loyal and passionate gamers there are. I think a game tailored to this niche could pull a good 300k subscribers who would stick around for years, and that would make it a bigger financial success than most of the MMOs being pushed out today.
they're giving the people what they want, and most people want to keep their loot. most players these days don't like dying in a dungeon and losing all their gear. can you blame them? sure, it makes the game challenging and you have to plan it all out so you don't run in and die, but i think for most people it's just not fun.
Actually they don't consider it fun or challenging. They simply seek their challenges in other parts of the game and see these mechanics as 'false challenges'.
they're giving the people what they want, and most people want to keep their loot. most players these days don't like dying in a dungeon and losing all their gear. can you blame them? sure, it makes the game challenging and you have to plan it all out so you don't run in and die, but i think for most people it's just not fun.
Actually they don't consider it fun or challenging. They simply seek their challenges in other parts of the game and see these mechanics as 'false challenges'.
I wouldn't call them false challenges. I think harsh death mechanics are more like a necessary evil. In order for encounters to be exciting, there needs to be some risk. Dying and respawning with all your gear and minimal XP loss/debt is not risk, and it doesn't create a sense of excitement or risk during encounters.
Nope. It's the absolute truth. That's what the term means. Look it up. I didn't make up a new definition. That's what it's always been. You trying to narrow it doesn't change that. The rest of what you have to say is theusual revisionist garbage. As for your last paragraph back atcha skippy.
The problem is that 'sandbox' is not really a binary term but rather a sliding scale. Every MMO will be part sandbox and part themepark. The important thing is where the restrictions on gameplay are. You go too far in one direction and you end up with Second Life which many people don't really consider a game anymore. You go too far in the other direction and you get into games that are hard to call RPGs anymore.
Well yes. But the real issue is the term sandbox can apply to all sorts of genres. And taking them all into account, mmos all tend to fall WAY into the sandbox territory.
OTOH, rather than say all MMOS are sandboxes, they should say all MMOs SO FAR are sandboxes. I imagine it could change at some point in the future.
Where the term themepark came from i don't know. Because its 'safe'? Height restrictions for certain rides? The fact there are rides at all?
Yet another thread of the "sandbox" vs "Themepark" thread. Simply put sandboxes simply dont make the kind of money that more scripted MMOs do. PERIOD. And with the costs of production out-of-control, very few are willing to put themselves in the position of doing something sandbox and risk losing a ton of funds. Even the ultra successful Blizz wont do it. They wouldnt want a "failure" on their hands that could possibly cause them reputational/business risk. They will continue to rely on their successful franchises and come out with a bunch of "2"'s, "3"'s etc. to keep people coming back (hey I know Imma be playing Starcraft 2
As far as the good ole days of death penalties, losing gear, long travel times and other extreme circumstances, no one's into that anymore except a niche portion of the gaming market. My suggestion to them is next time you die in WOW simply destroy all your purples and pretend you lost it for good. But seriously, no one has the time and our attention spans are too short to play games with harsh penalties. They are also "forced" challenges, not real ones (IMHO). A real challenge for me is beating a difficult encounter or ACCOMPLISHING a difficult task in game. I think its safe to say that most gamers today lean towards goal-oriented playstyles as opposed to "risk-based" ones.
Yet another thread of the "sandbox" vs "Themepark" thread. Simply put sandboxes simply dont make the kind of money that more scripted MMOs do. PERIOD. And with the costs of production out-of-control, very few are willing to put themselves in the position of doing something sandbox and risk losing a ton of funds. Even the ultra successful Blizz wont do it. They wouldnt want a "failure" on their hands that could possibly cause them reputational/business risk. They will continue to rely on their successful franchises and come out with a bunch of "2"'s, "3"'s etc. to keep people coming back (hey I know Imma be playing Starcraft 2
As far as the good ole days of death penalties, losing gear, long travel times and other extreme circumstances, no one's into that anymore except a niche portion of the gaming market. My suggestion to them is next time you die in WOW simply destroy all your purples and pretend you lost it for good. But seriously, no one has the time and our attention spans are too short to play games with harsh penalties. They are also "forced" challenges, not real ones (IMHO). A real challenge for me is beating a difficult encounter or ACCOMPLISHING a difficult task in game. I think its safe to say that most gamers today lean towards goal-oriented playstyles as opposed to "risk-based" ones.
My 2 coppers.
First of all, where's your proof that sandboxes can't make as much money as scripted MMOs? Sure, WoW has blown every sandbox out of the water - but it's blown every other game out of the water, too. It's a freak, the result of a confluence of factors that led to an upward spiral that still hasn't stopped. You can't take WoW's success and apply it like a formula to every other MMO out there. There will never be another WoW. Besides, I don't think we've seen a true sandbox-type game released in a long time, with the possible exception of Vanguard, which failed because it was miserably managed and not because of its core mechanics.
Second - maybe your attention span is too short, but don't pretend to speak for everyone. There's a sizable contingent of gamers out there who would love to give a more hardcore MMO a shot. It might not be 11 million, but it's not negligible either.
I agree with you that accomplishment is extremely important in MMOs, but I think we disagree about what constitutes accomplishment and in what setting accomplishment should take place. Specifically, I think accomplishment in MMOs has to occur over the medium-long term rather than the short term (think levels and long quests instead of kill-10-X errand quests), and that it absolutely must occur among a community of friends. Excessive soloing is the antithesis of proper MMO gameplay. If you want to solo all the time, there are other, single player RPGs that have much better combat mechanics. In order to compete, MMOs must emphasize community. It's really their only selling point.
Yet another thread of the "sandbox" vs "Themepark" thread. Simply put sandboxes simply dont make the kind of money that more scripted MMOs do. PERIOD. And with the costs of production out-of-control, very few are willing to put themselves in the position of doing something sandbox and risk losing a ton of funds. Even the ultra successful Blizz wont do it. They wouldnt want a "failure" on their hands that could possibly cause them reputational/business risk. They will continue to rely on their successful franchises and come out with a bunch of "2"'s, "3"'s etc. to keep people coming back (hey I know Imma be playing Starcraft 2
As far as the good ole days of death penalties, losing gear, long travel times and other extreme circumstances, no one's into that anymore except a niche portion of the gaming market. My suggestion to them is next time you die in WOW simply destroy all your purples and pretend you lost it for good. But seriously, no one has the time and our attention spans are too short to play games with harsh penalties. They are also "forced" challenges, not real ones (IMHO). A real challenge for me is beating a difficult encounter or ACCOMPLISHING a difficult task in game. I think its safe to say that most gamers today lean towards goal-oriented playstyles as opposed to "risk-based" ones.
My 2 coppers.
First of all, where's your proof that sandboxes can't make as much money as scripted MMOs? Sure, WoW has blown every sandbox out of the water - but it's blown every other game out of the water, too. It's a freak, the result of a confluence of factors that led to an upward spiral that still hasn't stopped. You can't take WoW's success and apply it like a formula to every other MMO out there. There will never be another WoW. Besides, I don't think we've seen a true sandbox-type game released in a long time, with the possible exception of Vanguard, which failed because it was miserably managed and not because of its core mechanics.
Second - maybe your attention span is too short, but don't pretend to speak for everyone. There's a sizable contingent of gamers out there who would love to give a more hardcore MMO a shot. It might not be 11 million, but it's not negligible either.
I agree with you that accomplishment is extremely important in MMOs, but I think we disagree about what constitutes accomplishment and in what setting accomplishment should take place. Specifically, I think accomplishment in MMOs has to occur over the medium-long term rather than the short term (think levels and long quests instead of kill-10-X errand quests), and that it absolutely must occur among a community of friends. Excessive soloing is the antithesis of proper MMO gameplay. If you want to solo all the time, there are other, single player RPGs that have much better combat mechanics. In order to compete, MMOs must emphasize community. It's really their only selling point.
I didnt supply "proof" that sandboxes dont make as much money as themeparks because I dont need to. Thus far in MMO history they have not. As a whole the sandbox genre simply has not been as successful. If they were, there would be more in existence and more successful developers (ie: Blizzard) would have jumped in and developed their own. I didnt say that there would NEVER be one as successful as a themepark, but so far there hasnt been. And btw, I wasnt comparing WOW's success to anything....you got the "WOW on the brain MMORPG.com syndrome". I was speaking about genre's, not about a particular game. The WOW comment was in context to their development of a sandbox type game.
As far as attention spans that was an overgeneralization, but then I didnt think someone was going to disect my post And perhaps its not so much a matter of attention span as it is "TIME". And where's your proof of this sizable amount of gamers that want hardcore? Im sorry, but other than a few "waxing on days of old" and the hardcore lifers, I dont see an abundance them.
As you stated YOU think accomplishments have to occur over s pecific time period, and must be amoungst a community of friends. Others opinions differ and people play for very different reasons. Some people play to dominate, play to "win" (whatever that definition is to them) or want faster results to their efforts. /shrug I have given up trying to dictate to anyone what their playstyle should be. I have always found to my dismay that raid success or even enjoying an mmo has nothing to do with being amoungst friends (if one beleives MMO persons are really "friends"). It was about being amoungst committed players that know their class and are willing to do what it takes to beat an encounter. And your comment about soloing is odd coming from you. From what I remember you preferred it. But Im not getting into the solo vs group argument because I personally think its stupid. People will play the way they want to play in that regard and if we dont like it we can take a walk off a short pier. No one cares. Some people are happy soloing in an MMO chatroom and will pay good money on a monthly basis to do so.
Live and let live. Agree to disagree! Goodnight and good luck!
What is the single reason that there are so many wow clone theme park games out there? The answer is : Because people play them.
When us older farts (I'm only 35 hehe) first sat down to play mmos in the early days it wasn't to play some mouse on a wheel spinning after gear crap. For many of us, including the developers, it was the pnp Dungeons and Dragons finally actualized. Sure the UI was clunky but there was some aspect of it that made you feel like you were part of the environment. Most new developers probably haven't even seen a D20
Now its all this free to play nonsense which wouldn't be a scam if it didn't FEEL like a scam and if they werent trying to hide the fact you don't get something for nothing.
In my mind MMOs were never going to be cooperative single player RPG games. They were meant to be game worlds with an ecosystem made up of various parts but primarily influenced by the players. Sandbox means: here is a bucket of toys, go play with them.
The best thing that can happen to this industry is for there to be a seperation in ideology. I dont want to be called a mmorpg gamer anymore and any game that offers fedx and kill as its primary entertainment can go. I believe its time for a new paradigm that seperates those that understand the properties of what goes into making good virtual worlds and those that think that World of Warcraft is the Rosetta Stone of online interactive game play.
The last 10 years of gaming has been spent developing hatred for what the genre has become. You can say how innovative the graphics engines have become but if you boil game play down it hasn't changed. The level wheel has been perfected to be the perfect result of scripted programming instead of the otherway around.
anyway have a nice day.
Color coded responses below:
Well, you start off good. Developers and publishers usually try to produce something that is fun
I would be willing to feel that you felt that way because there was nothing comparable at the time. IF you were to play a game with the UI that was as terrible as the original UO (or Everquest) you would drop that sub in a second
You actually get something for P2P? Aren't both selling non-tangible entertainment? Should people not like the show "Lost" or "House" because they're on free channels? Should only HBO and Showtime be acceptable because they aren't free entertainment?
Fortunately, your mind has very little influence on the real world. How could you not expect a concept that involved a genre famous for "having parties" and RPC interactions? (D&D, Shadowrun, Werewolf, Rifts, etc) Most RPG video games before this (All the D&D Games, Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, etc) usually involved forming parties with heals, dps, and sometimes tanks that were all controlled by one player. How could you not imagine that, if you had a common world for people to interact in at the same time not be used for interactive play? If you want a first player game with an expansive world, play Fallout3 or Oblivion- you can have fluctuating economies and expansive worlds through mods. Sandbox, could just as easily mean "unfinished crap that is so light on content that you have to use your imagination like you were in a sandbox, except in sandboxes you can have water and a shovel- the closest things to a true sandbox in this genre are Saga of Ryzom and a EVE Online- most of the "Sandboxes" are unfinished crap that are full of bugs and light on content.
Okay, this I actually agree with. I, however, think there are three categories:
Games that are great and I play for a while and keep going back to.
Games that are fun but I lose interest in after a few months but do not regret.
Games that are so awful and unfinished the fans should sue the developer and publisher for false advertising and theft.
The problem is that entertainment is really dependent on the audience.
Really? This sentence boils down the whole rant very well: this guy thinks that only he knows how to have fun and that his tastes are the best tastes. I've played a lot of games and a lot of MMOs and the people are usually the same in all of them, there are just different amounts of jackasses in each game. F2P has the most by far because jackasses generally don't make a lot of friends or money. However, playing EVE for me is like watching the grass grow. Okay to do if you're sitting in the sun, having a beer, and checking out the MILF across the street because watching the grass grow if effing boring, but not while alone in a dark room by yourself. I'm not saying that he's wrong to say that EVE is fun- it is for about 250K people, I just don't like it and I find it to be rather ignorant and pretentious to say that all the other games, like WoW (he just loves to bash that game), are terrible in comparison simply because he finds them to be too easy on the eyes and have better UIs then the games of old. MMORPGs should be unfriendly and difficult to play! If you want content, use your imagination! (Just keep paying us for a subpar product). Please.
How does that in any way exclude any MMO? In fact it's such a poor and self contradictory wording it can be applied to any game in any fashion. Games being artificial environments cannot be free of artificial structural constraints. You can play creatively in any game environment through emergent behavior. Wikipedia can be easily edited by anyone that chooses to do so. You'll need to do more than type inanity and insults to make your point.
It's a difficult point to make, because the term is a loose one. It's a lot easier to just stick to hard definitions and act like that's more logical.
I agree with you, that the term gets misused quite a bit. It starts with people talking about it as if its innately superior to linearity, and then some get mixed up, and want to call everything they like a sandbox, and everything they don't, a themepark. Such is loose terminology, though. It can be annoying, but hardly calls for tossing the word out entirely or negating it by calling all MMOs sandboxes. Sure, they might be, compared to some games, but its a very comparative term, generally used within a given genre.
e.g. GTA is a sandbox compared to other shooters, even though it has no cooking or mining at all. What it does, somewhat like sandbox MMOs, is give the player a variety of directions and choices, in an open map, rather than funnelling them down a more singular linear path - compared to other games of similar genre. Whereas, if you try to compare GTA to WoW, it might seem WoW is more of a sandbox. That would make the term confusing, as the nature of the gameplay is so different, comparisons like that get more complicated.
Still, GTA is more of a "sandbox," WoW is more of a "themepark." Most of us can at least agree on that much?
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Wow is not a sandbox. . or "guided themepark sandbox" I can't go wherever I want. If I head of in direction B it is meant for level 70 and I am level 1. I would agro crap from far away and get one shot. Could I go there sure. . I just can't do anything. Even with 20 friends I could not kill a mob in a level 50 zone at level 2. I can't recieve quests and all of the items on the vendor are incredibly out of my price range. There is absolutly no content there that a level 1-10 can access aside from walking. If Wow is a sandbox then it is the worst sandbox ever.
WoW. . in no way. . is a sandbox. . just because I can walk my char. there (even though I can do absolutely nothing else that is indended for that "zone" doesn't make it a sandbox.
The moment you stop in town and chat on general you've gone sandbox. They gave you a world to play in and you choose to play the social aspect of the game; playing with the other kids in the box.
I like to think about this debate quantumly. The games are both themepark and sandbox simultaneously. Everything depends on the observer.
Originally posted by Jupp I just love when people draw the D&D card when it comes to computer games.... *sigh* I play D&D since more than two decades now and I can tell you that it is as near to a theme park as it can be. D&D is pure entertainment and players want to be entertained as good as possible. As a DM you cut out all the boring stuff (and with 1e or even brown box D&D that was possible without a problem) and let the players have a good time at the table. I never saw players that had fun in playing out mining, gathering food, repairing items, etc, at the table, never ever. This stuff is handwaved in a matter of seconds at the table 99% of the time.
Now.
But do you remember the old "companion set"?
Yes, this one:
You could even build an empire. There were rules on recruiting armies, gathering companions, building castles, ruling over people... there were rules on pretty much doing whatever you wanted.
There's nothing more like that nowadays. But once D&D was huge, about imagining worlds, not about excel-ing for the perfect build or the exploitable loophole in the game rules. It wasn't about the DM telling you what to do and applying the superbalanced v235.2 rules, it was about telling the DM "hey, i want to research a combination of Shield and Speed spells concentrated on my fists, so i can have a cool melee attack just like some kind of fantasy Kenshiro"... and the DM would make that new spell for you (for a price >:D)
Comments
I dont' see how games like wow encourage solo playing.
I played wow a year ago. After reaching endgame, the only thing to do is dungeon, raids, battleground, and arena. All of which need a group.
Also, people laughed about how wow is about gearscoring. But they failed to understand developers like that. When ever themepark players run out of contenrts, the only thing the developers need to do is design a bigger dragon which drop a bigger swords. Which to me is alot easier to do than picking money from the sandbox players.
Let me sum up the OP's post for you:
Blah blah blah *Feeling nostalgia* Blah blah blah *Feeling nostalgia* Blah blah my first gaming moments are better then yours Blah blah blah
I suspect there is such a market, but its size has yet to be determined. Given what these titles cost to produce, and the risk adversion involved(especially at this point in history) I suspect that there isn't the funding available for such a project. That may change as middleware evolves further. But for now I'd have to say that the chances aren't too good.
By definition all MMOs are sandboxes.
What an absolute brainless bit of crock.Break a definition down past its outmost minimum, and then everything you want can qaulify for it.
"A Chair is a thing that can be sat on "-new definition for a chair,now horses and cats qaulify as chairs.And of course get some puffed up "expert" to explain why this bit of rubbish opinion claimed as THE definition is better then any others........and be sure he references some authority on why he's right,instead of simply using logic and reason lol
Its amazing,most games actually work to raise a persons reasoning ability,but so many die hard mmo fans seem to actually show continued loss of such.....Its like they get dumber by the day.
A sandbox is one of the ultimate representations of free spirited play.You sit it and play with and make of it what ever you want that you can.You dont need someone telling you to build a sand castle before you can do so.You dont need to be told where your allowed to build said castle,YOU pick the spot in the sandbox, and you do it as you please.
The more restrictions on your actions an mmo throws at you, the less sandbox it is.The more guided your actions are in an mmo, the more themepark it is.There is of course no perfection.No perfect example of either,and none possible.But to seize an elephants leg and define it as a tree trunk,is about as well thought out as claiming "all mmos are sandboxs".
A very small ,but very important bit of wisdom when dealing with such...."The word is NOT the thing".In other words ,neither one nor a hundred morons calling a cat a chair,make a cat a chair,OR all mmos sandboxs .
Years ago you could tell the distinct difference between a mmo and a basic online rpg. Now the only difference is a monthly fee and microtransactions. How sad it has become over the years. Now I am not saying it is completely bad because their will be some enjoyable mmos to come but in reality it seems we really haven't improved the genre a whole bunch.
Whenever I hear anecdotes from old timers about how they were PK'd and lost all there loot 10 years ago I feel like writing move along dude get with the current decade. You may hate them but the big upcoming mmos SWTOR, FF XIV, and Cataclysm show you what most folks really want in online gaming.Just like there are people who visit disneyland theme parks, there are people who enjoys "packaged" entertainment. There's nothing wrong with theme parks or packaged entertainment. People who try to dictate what other people wants simply are in it for the attention (like "Hey guys I'm cool, look at me, I like doing stuff that others aren't doing!"). Everyone has their own taste in gaming there are people who wants sandbox approach while there are people who wants "packaged" theme park approach.
Yep. MMOs have barely changed in 10 years. Someone needs to start taking risks before the whole genre goes down the tubes.
Virtual Reality
The problem is that 'sandbox' is not really a binary term but rather a sliding scale. Every MMO will be part sandbox and part themepark. The important thing is where the restrictions on gameplay are. You go too far in one direction and you end up with Second Life which many people don't really consider a game anymore. You go too far in the other direction and you get into games that are hard to call RPGs anymore.
What make a theme park game a themepark?
The cross server pvp mini games?
The raids? Instanced or not
The storyline and related quests?
The defined classes?
What the hell is left?
We are reverting to some pre-mmorpg neolithic game where the mobs just are all over the place, no story, not quests, no classes, no dungeons raids?
Oh you want a completely interactive and player diven world?? Go play free realms, have to warn you its a hauge themepark, since that is what players will ultimately add if given the chance...since you know its what they want.
Give me an example of your sandbox utopia please, im curious to how your game mechanics would flesh out, as well as your purpose in the game.
The far end of the sandbox/themepark spectrum is second life. It is so far on the sandbox end that it almost falls off the end and is nearly not a game. In pure sandbox, there is no defined purpose for a character.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
I saw this thread and the first thing that entered my mind was 'here we go, another pointless 'I hate WoW' thread' .. But then I read it. I absolutely agree with you 100%.. thats all I have to add.
@zym
Ive heard this same inane stance before,took some time to remember from where.You read lassi's crap and actually bought it.He couldnt sell it to any but the braindead ,what circa 5 years ago....But you sure latched onto it
Hahahhahhahahhahhhahahhaaha.
Wow.....
Did you just cut and paste from his article,or actually really use wikipedia as a "reliable source" ?You know, like he did.
Again far too funny.
Oh wait, you couldnt have used the wikipedia,at least not recently as they changed that whole article , and instead went with something far more accurate.
"The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by their ability to play creatively, boundless of artificial structural constraints, and with there being "no right way ".
Whats next, gonna try and sell us some "wisdom" on mmo design from Smed,Troop,Godager,McQauid,Garriot,or any other number of the MMO industry failures ?
Regurgitation,its what makes the MMO industry the absolute crap it is.And keeps it that way.And your doing your part arent you ...
Hhahahhahahhahahahah
they're giving the people what they want, and most people want to keep their loot. most players these days don't like dying in a dungeon and losing all their gear. can you blame them? sure, it makes the game challenging and you have to plan it all out so you don't run in and die, but i think for most people it's just not fun. as for the sandbox style gameplay, old time MMO players just need to realize that things are changing and the new generation of MMO players want theme park style MMOs. sandbox MMOs take up to much time and are harder to get the hang of.
First of all, I don't think anyone's asking that players lose their gear every time they die. Even in EQ, this almost never happened. Corpses stuck around for what, like a week? If you couldn't find someone to rez you in a week, you didn't deserve your gear back.
Having said that, you're probably right. Most players are looking for theme park games. But that doesn't mean there isn't a sizable contingent out there looking for something else. It may be a niche, but it's a niche of some of the most loyal and passionate gamers there are. I think a game tailored to this niche could pull a good 300k subscribers who would stick around for years, and that would make it a bigger financial success than most of the MMOs being pushed out today.
Virtual Reality
Actually they don't consider it fun or challenging. They simply seek their challenges in other parts of the game and see these mechanics as 'false challenges'.
I wouldn't call them false challenges. I think harsh death mechanics are more like a necessary evil. In order for encounters to be exciting, there needs to be some risk. Dying and respawning with all your gear and minimal XP loss/debt is not risk, and it doesn't create a sense of excitement or risk during encounters.
Virtual Reality
Well yes. But the real issue is the term sandbox can apply to all sorts of genres. And taking them all into account, mmos all tend to fall WAY into the sandbox territory.
OTOH, rather than say all MMOS are sandboxes, they should say all MMOs SO FAR are sandboxes. I imagine it could change at some point in the future.
Where the term themepark came from i don't know. Because its 'safe'? Height restrictions for certain rides? The fact there are rides at all?
Yet another thread of the "sandbox" vs "Themepark" thread. Simply put sandboxes simply dont make the kind of money that more scripted MMOs do. PERIOD. And with the costs of production out-of-control, very few are willing to put themselves in the position of doing something sandbox and risk losing a ton of funds. Even the ultra successful Blizz wont do it. They wouldnt want a "failure" on their hands that could possibly cause them reputational/business risk. They will continue to rely on their successful franchises and come out with a bunch of "2"'s, "3"'s etc. to keep people coming back (hey I know Imma be playing Starcraft 2
As far as the good ole days of death penalties, losing gear, long travel times and other extreme circumstances, no one's into that anymore except a niche portion of the gaming market. My suggestion to them is next time you die in WOW simply destroy all your purples and pretend you lost it for good. But seriously, no one has the time and our attention spans are too short to play games with harsh penalties. They are also "forced" challenges, not real ones (IMHO). A real challenge for me is beating a difficult encounter or ACCOMPLISHING a difficult task in game. I think its safe to say that most gamers today lean towards goal-oriented playstyles as opposed to "risk-based" ones.
My 2 coppers.
Current Games: WOW, EVE Online
First of all, where's your proof that sandboxes can't make as much money as scripted MMOs? Sure, WoW has blown every sandbox out of the water - but it's blown every other game out of the water, too. It's a freak, the result of a confluence of factors that led to an upward spiral that still hasn't stopped. You can't take WoW's success and apply it like a formula to every other MMO out there. There will never be another WoW. Besides, I don't think we've seen a true sandbox-type game released in a long time, with the possible exception of Vanguard, which failed because it was miserably managed and not because of its core mechanics.
Second - maybe your attention span is too short, but don't pretend to speak for everyone. There's a sizable contingent of gamers out there who would love to give a more hardcore MMO a shot. It might not be 11 million, but it's not negligible either.
I agree with you that accomplishment is extremely important in MMOs, but I think we disagree about what constitutes accomplishment and in what setting accomplishment should take place. Specifically, I think accomplishment in MMOs has to occur over the medium-long term rather than the short term (think levels and long quests instead of kill-10-X errand quests), and that it absolutely must occur among a community of friends. Excessive soloing is the antithesis of proper MMO gameplay. If you want to solo all the time, there are other, single player RPGs that have much better combat mechanics. In order to compete, MMOs must emphasize community. It's really their only selling point.
Virtual Reality
I didnt supply "proof" that sandboxes dont make as much money as themeparks because I dont need to. Thus far in MMO history they have not. As a whole the sandbox genre simply has not been as successful. If they were, there would be more in existence and more successful developers (ie: Blizzard) would have jumped in and developed their own. I didnt say that there would NEVER be one as successful as a themepark, but so far there hasnt been. And btw, I wasnt comparing WOW's success to anything....you got the "WOW on the brain MMORPG.com syndrome". I was speaking about genre's, not about a particular game. The WOW comment was in context to their development of a sandbox type game.
As far as attention spans that was an overgeneralization, but then I didnt think someone was going to disect my post
And perhaps its not so much a matter of attention span as it is "TIME". And where's your proof of this sizable amount of gamers that want hardcore? Im sorry, but other than a few "waxing on days of old" and the hardcore lifers, I dont see an abundance them.
As you stated YOU think accomplishments have to occur over s pecific time period, and must be amoungst a community of friends. Others opinions differ and people play for very different reasons. Some people play to dominate, play to "win" (whatever that definition is to them) or want faster results to their efforts. /shrug I have given up trying to dictate to anyone what their playstyle should be. I have always found to my dismay that raid success or even enjoying an mmo has nothing to do with being amoungst friends (if one beleives MMO persons are really "friends"). It was about being amoungst committed players that know their class and are willing to do what it takes to beat an encounter. And your comment about soloing is odd coming from you. From what I remember you preferred it. But Im not getting into the solo vs group argument because I personally think its stupid. People will play the way they want to play in that regard and if we dont like it we can take a walk off a short pier. No one cares. Some people are happy soloing in an MMO chatroom and will pay good money on a monthly basis to do so.
Live and let live. Agree to disagree! Goodnight and good luck!
Current Games: WOW, EVE Online
Color coded responses below:
Well, you start off good. Developers and publishers usually try to produce something that is fun
I would be willing to feel that you felt that way because there was nothing comparable at the time. IF you were to play a game with the UI that was as terrible as the original UO (or Everquest) you would drop that sub in a second
You actually get something for P2P? Aren't both selling non-tangible entertainment? Should people not like the show "Lost" or "House" because they're on free channels? Should only HBO and Showtime be acceptable because they aren't free entertainment?
Fortunately, your mind has very little influence on the real world. How could you not expect a concept that involved a genre famous for "having parties" and RPC interactions? (D&D, Shadowrun, Werewolf, Rifts, etc) Most RPG video games before this (All the D&D Games, Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, etc) usually involved forming parties with heals, dps, and sometimes tanks that were all controlled by one player. How could you not imagine that, if you had a common world for people to interact in at the same time not be used for interactive play? If you want a first player game with an expansive world, play Fallout3 or Oblivion- you can have fluctuating economies and expansive worlds through mods. Sandbox, could just as easily mean "unfinished crap that is so light on content that you have to use your imagination like you were in a sandbox, except in sandboxes you can have water and a shovel- the closest things to a true sandbox in this genre are Saga of Ryzom and a EVE Online- most of the "Sandboxes" are unfinished crap that are full of bugs and light on content.
Okay, this I actually agree with. I, however, think there are three categories:
Games that are great and I play for a while and keep going back to.
Games that are fun but I lose interest in after a few months but do not regret.
Games that are so awful and unfinished the fans should sue the developer and publisher for false advertising and theft.
The problem is that entertainment is really dependent on the audience.
Really? This sentence boils down the whole rant very well: this guy thinks that only he knows how to have fun and that his tastes are the best tastes. I've played a lot of games and a lot of MMOs and the people are usually the same in all of them, there are just different amounts of jackasses in each game. F2P has the most by far because jackasses generally don't make a lot of friends or money. However, playing EVE for me is like watching the grass grow. Okay to do if you're sitting in the sun, having a beer, and checking out the MILF across the street because watching the grass grow if effing boring, but not while alone in a dark room by yourself. I'm not saying that he's wrong to say that EVE is fun- it is for about 250K people, I just don't like it and I find it to be rather ignorant and pretentious to say that all the other games, like WoW (he just loves to bash that game), are terrible in comparison simply because he finds them to be too easy on the eyes and have better UIs then the games of old. MMORPGs should be unfriendly and difficult to play! If you want content, use your imagination! (Just keep paying us for a subpar product). Please.
You don't really mean that
A witty saying proves nothing.
-Voltaire
It's a difficult point to make, because the term is a loose one. It's a lot easier to just stick to hard definitions and act like that's more logical.
I agree with you, that the term gets misused quite a bit. It starts with people talking about it as if its innately superior to linearity, and then some get mixed up, and want to call everything they like a sandbox, and everything they don't, a themepark. Such is loose terminology, though. It can be annoying, but hardly calls for tossing the word out entirely or negating it by calling all MMOs sandboxes. Sure, they might be, compared to some games, but its a very comparative term, generally used within a given genre.
e.g. GTA is a sandbox compared to other shooters, even though it has no cooking or mining at all. What it does, somewhat like sandbox MMOs, is give the player a variety of directions and choices, in an open map, rather than funnelling them down a more singular linear path - compared to other games of similar genre. Whereas, if you try to compare GTA to WoW, it might seem WoW is more of a sandbox. That would make the term confusing, as the nature of the gameplay is so different, comparisons like that get more complicated.
Still, GTA is more of a "sandbox," WoW is more of a "themepark." Most of us can at least agree on that much?
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
The moment you stop in town and chat on general you've gone sandbox. They gave you a world to play in and you choose to play the social aspect of the game; playing with the other kids in the box.
I like to think about this debate quantumly. The games are both themepark and sandbox simultaneously. Everything depends on the observer.
Now.
But do you remember the old "companion set"?
Yes, this one:
You could even build an empire. There were rules on recruiting armies, gathering companions, building castles, ruling over people... there were rules on pretty much doing whatever you wanted.
There's nothing more like that nowadays. But once D&D was huge, about imagining worlds, not about excel-ing for the perfect build or the exploitable loophole in the game rules. It wasn't about the DM telling you what to do and applying the superbalanced v235.2 rules, it was about telling the DM "hey, i want to research a combination of Shield and Speed spells concentrated on my fists, so i can have a cool melee attack just like some kind of fantasy Kenshiro"... and the DM would make that new spell for you (for a price >:D)